From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3127 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2013 14:13:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 3118 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Feb 2013 14:13:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 14:13:19 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1IEDGq3001462 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 09:13:16 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-18.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.18]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1IEDBrK025657 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 09:13:14 -0500 Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 14:13:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: "Metzger, Markus T" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , "markus.t.metzger@gmail.com" Subject: Re: [rfc 6/8] record disas: omit function names by default Message-ID: <20130218141311.GA9315@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <1360859352-30399-1-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <1360859352-30399-7-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <20130215161049.GA6219@host2.jankratochvil.net> <831uchtp4y.fsf@gnu.org> <20130215183256.GA16845@host2.jankratochvil.net> <83sj4xs8hp.fsf@gnu.org> <20130215190955.GA18269@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20130218130247.GA7250@host2.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2013-02/txt/msg00453.txt.bz2 On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 14:29:48 +0100, Metzger, Markus T wrote: > How long did it take you? Longer than a newbie give up on trying to understand it. :-) > "record trace-functions" sounds like it would enable tracing functions. I agree. > If it has to be some two-word combination, I'd rather go with "record list-", i.e. > "record list-functions", "record list-lines", and, for the sake of consistency, > "record list-instructions". Yes. In fact "record disassemble" (or "btrace disassemble") also do not seem so obvious to me. > Or are you OK with "record disassemble" and "record list" and just objecting > to "record backtrace"? I primarily object "record backtrace", but those two are also not obvious IMO. > I intend to remove the "btrace" command and all its sub-commands. I just kept them > so people can compare them with the new "record" commands. > > Regarding "brace list" I do not plan to add a corresponding "record" command. What should do the current "record list" hook other than what "btrace list" did? Current to_list_record and to_list_record_range are always left NULL in archer-mmetzger-btrace so there isn't what to compare yet:) (gdb) record list You can't do that when your target is `record-btrace' Thanks, Jan